Buckmaster, Fillfield II, or AETEC

jdreddish · 01-09-2005, 07:37 PM

I think I have narrowed it down to these 3 scopes. It's going on a Rem 700 .243

1. Nikon BuckMaster 3-9x40
2. Burris Fullfield II 3-9x40
3. Simmons AETEC 2.8-12X44

Any input would be helpful, Thanks

speedgator · 01-09-2005, 07:58 PM

I have the Fullfield II in 3-9x40mm and it's really good! I compared it side by side in the same lighting conditions to just about every single other manufacturer and different series within those manufacturers lines including the other two scopes you mention and only Zeiss was just as or perhaps a bit more "crisp".

halcon · 01-09-2005, 08:03 PM

I have the nikon Buckmaster and the Aetec scope and to me the Aetec is the clearest of the two in poor light . I have never tried the Burris scopes and doubt I ever will after the problems I had with one of thier spotting scopes .

newguy23 · 01-09-2005, 08:05 PM

All good choices... Right now I would go with the Fullfield II, because you can get it and the free 20x50 spotter deal... That is if you like the ballistic plex recticle. I don't personally like it, but a lot of people do.

I would also throw into the mix the Sightron SII, it is a great scope for the price.

Mike from Texas · 01-09-2005, 08:35 PM

I throw in another vote for the Aetec. I have a 2.8-10 x 44 on my .260 and I don't think you can buy a better scope for the money.

newguy23 · 01-09-2005, 10:17 PM

I won't argue with the AETEC.. I think it is a great scope...

Jason N · 01-10-2005, 08:30 AM

No complaints with my 2.8-10x44 Aetec either. Fine scope for the money.....bright, clear and accurate. I'll put one on my next long range rifle as well.

m.t.hands · 01-10-2005, 10:55 AM

another vote for the aetec, mine is a 2.8X10X44 on a encore m/l'er barrel 3 years and no complaints

, btw i'm a leupold person but this scope has changed my thinkin on lower priced optics, and i really didn't want to spend 400+ on a scope for a gun i only hunt with for one week of our long season

.....